Godless China has invited Art of Living (AOL) founder, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, for a religious leaders’ meeting and a satsang near Beijing later this month. This would be the spiritual leader’s first China visit.

Sources said state-run China Overseas Friendship Association (COFA) is organising the event on October 24 and 25 and around 400 people from across the country are expected to attend the satsang. They said Beijing gave its go ahead for the event to promote bilateral ties with India and that the invitation is the first of its kind to any Indian religious figure.

HH Sri Sri Ravi Shankar

“We expect senior businessmen, show business celebrities, medical, educational experts and even psychiatrists to attend the event,” said Tang Qiyu, who would host the event at his ashram-like resort for yoga and meditation on the outskirts of the capital. Sources said Tang’s efforts made the invitation for the spiritual leader possible.

Tang, a businessman, has invested over $15 million in the resort that offers yoga training facilities. The businessman developed the resort and dedicated it to Sri Sri after meeting him in Bangalore last year.

During his Beijing visit, Amolji said he found a strong inclination among the Chinese towards spiritualism. Apart from Amolji, several AOL teachers from Bangalore have visited and trained over two dozen Chinese spiritual teachers in Shanghai and Beijing in the last two years.

Indians are good people, but this can sometimes become a problem, especially in the fields of defence and foreign policy. Why so?

Too often they believe that others are like them. The best example has been the first Indian prime minister’s Hindi-Chini bhai-bhai policy. Jawaharlal Nehru believed in the fraternity of nations, he believed in peaceful co-existence, mutual non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty; he tried hard to impose these lofty principles on India’s neighbours, and particularly on China.

A clever Zhou Enlai pretended to agree with the principles, but his mind functioned differently. Zhou, like his mentor Mao Zedong, was a hardcore revolutionary who believed in the omnipotence of war. Is it not the Great Helmsman who wrote, ‘Some people have ridiculed us as the advocates of omnipotence of war. Yes, we are: We are the advocates of the omnipotence of the revolutionary war, which is not bad at all, but good and is Marxist.’

Chinese Flag

There is nothing wrong in believing in the omnipotence of peace, as long one does not forget that others may think (and act) differently.In the case of Nehru, the result was not long to come; eight years after signing the Panchsheel Agreement, China treacherously attacked India in the North East Frontier Agency and Ladakh. The nation paid a heavy price for not being able to understand the Chinese way of thinking.

The tragedy is that 50 years later, many in India still believe that the priority No 1 of India’s foreign policy should be to be friends with China. Once again, there is nothing wrong to be China’s ‘friend’ or even ‘brother’, but it should not be at the cost of India’s interests or by bending backward over each whim and fancy of a single-party regime in Beijing.

In India, you will find different types of apologists. Some could be called ‘lackeys’ (to use Mao’s parlance): They usually have business or academic interests in China and love the reception they get when they travel to the Middle Kingdom. Let us not waste time over them.

Many sincerely believe that India and China are two emerging economies, for a long time under the political and economic thumb of the West (in particular the United States), therefore their destiny is intimately linked. Their ‘logical’ conclusion is that Beijing and Delhi [ Images ] should work in tandem. They give a recent example: the common position at Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change.

I will not go into details but I totally disagree. Although there is one common denominator (the fast development rate), India’s case is totally different from China’s.

Even Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recently stated in Washington: ‘Well, I have no hesitation in saying that I think development in India cannot be a carbon copy of what happens in China. And the Chinese system is very different.’

India

Speaking to CNN, he reiterated his government’s stand: ‘There is enough economic space for both our countries to realise the growth ambitions of our respective countries.’ He however made it clear: ‘We are a functioning democracy Democracy is slow-moving I always believed that it may be slow-moving in the short term, but in the long run, an arrangement which has the backing of the people at large will prove to be more durable.’

If one analyses the future of the two countries, this should be kept in mind. India and China are different and their destinies may go in opposite directions.

Wei Jingsheng, the most famous Chinese dissident who spent 18 years in jail for proposing in the 1970’s ‘democracy’ as the fifth ‘modernisation’, (Deng Xiaoping had spoken of the Four Modernisations) recently wrote an article in The Christian Science Monitor. He opposed the sentence of 11 years in prison for the mild dissident Liu Xiaobo.

Wei noted that because China ‘now sits prominently at the tables of global governance’, its leaders think thus: ‘Since you made a fuss about releasing Liu after his arrest, we will punish him even more severely. In no uncertain terms, that will let you know that not only don’t we care what you think, but we don’t have to.’

Wei adds: ‘We Chinese are intimately acquainted with this authoritarian arrogance’, before concluding: ‘Now that China’s leaders believe their prospering nation has emerged as a player in world history just as America’s prestige has been weakened by the Iraq war and the recent financial meltdown, the hardliners have been able to wrest the upper hand once again.’

No goody-goody Indian analyst will view things like this, though Indian ‘experts’ would better grasp China if they could understand the centrality of the survival of the Communist party in the preoccupation of all Chinese leaders.

Today there is one issue which preoccupies the apparatchiks in Beijing more than anything else: the rate of the yuan. Indeed the fate of the regime depends on the continuation of the growth rate which itself largely depends on the low rate of the Chinese currency.

In 2009, the Barack Obama administration tried the bhai-bhai way with Beijing, accepting to drop a proposed meeting between the Dalai Lama and later forgetting all contentious issues during the November presidential visit to Beijing. But it did not pay off; Beijing hardened its stance in all fronts.

In 2010, Obama seems decided to show the mandarins in Beijing that the US remains a power to reckon with. He will meet the Dalai Lama and sell Black Hawk helicopters and anti-missile batteries to Taiwan.

The Washington Post pointed out that many American analysts today believe that ‘the Obama administration — with its intensive outreach to Beijing — tried too hard in its first year to cultivate ties with China. Playing hard to get might have helped smooth out China’s swagger.’

Another US expert explained: ‘We’re in the role of the supplicant’ while a senior US trade official mildly threatened: ‘If [Beijing] continues on this particular path in a strong and inflexible way, there will be a significant political backlash not just in the United States. China needs to be aware of that.’

For these reasons, Beijing will have to reevaluate its currency, sooner or later. Even in China many agree that China has no choice. Zhang Bing, a researcher at the Institute of World Economics and Politics under the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, stated in a research paper that the government’s current yuan policy of gradual reform is wrong. Zhang admitted: ‘There’s a very urgent need for pushing forward the reform plan on the yuan and now is the best timing.’ He concluded that ‘a 10 percent appreciation in the yuan against the dollar should have a limited impact on the Chinese economy. It would reduce speculative fund inflows by effectively eliminating expectations of a yuan appreciation.’

Whether Beijing decides to reevaluate the yuan in 2010 or not, ultimately the decision is inescapable and this will have incalculable consequences for the Middle Kingdom.

On January 1, Swaminathan Aiyar in The Economic Times predicted that during the next decade: ‘India will overtake China as the fastest-growing economy in the world. China will start ageing and suffering from a declining workforce, and will be forced to revalue its currency. So its growth will decelerate, just as Japan decelerated in the 1990s after looking unstoppable in the 1980s. Having become the world’s second-biggest economy, China’s export-oriented model will erode sharply — the world will no longer be able to absorb its exports at the earlier pace.’

Well, the future will tell us if the prediction was true. But in the meantime, Chinese supremacy may continue for some time. According to deal tracking firm Dealogic: ‘Global property sector M&A [merger & acquisitions] reached just $151.8 billion in 2009, the lowest level since 2003’. However, China witnessed an increase of 41 percent in its M&A levels from its previous year: ‘China attracted deals amounting to $29.3 billion or 19 percent of the global volume — the highest total on record,’ commented Dealogic.

The only certainty is that the situation of the Middle Kingdom is far more unstable than in India. A scenario found on The Financial Times’ web site makes interesting studying. The author projects himself to 2019 when shortage of water in China heralds the end of an epoch: ‘By 2015, it was [already] obvious: China was seriously parched. The Great Wall of Credit of 2009-2012 had unleashed too much industrial capacity consuming too much water. That exacerbated a nationwide shortage — China had more than a fifth of the world’s population, but only 6 per cent of its fresh water. Four years later and the crisis has taken on ruinous dimensions. Crop failure and famine in the deserted interiors; emergency rationing in the teeming coastal cities Ten years ago [2009] China had it all: a well-nourished workforce, vast reserves of paper money, a new swagger on the international stage. The sharp currency revaluation of 2010 unleashed a global mergers and acquisitions spree the likes of which the world had never seen That president Xi Jinping is considering beseeching poorer neighbours for food aid is a measure of how far the mighty have fallen.’

One can envisage several other scenarios, but one point is certain, China will have to face far more serious problems than India in the years to come. For sure, there is no need for India to club its future with that of the Middle Kingdom. One of the possible future scenarios is certainly a conflict with India for water which will be triggered by the nervousness of the declining empire.India can continue to believe in the omnipotence of peace, but it should be ready for any eventuality.

January 13, 2010

India must be fully prepared to defend its borders in the Northeastern region while striving for improved bilateral ties with China in trade and other fields, Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Dorjee Khandu said on Tuesday.

“Border issues are dealt with by the Central government. As chief minister of Arunachal Pradesh, I would like the Central government to be in all preparedness on the borders, while striving for improving bilateral trade and relations to the benefit of both,” Khandu told PTI in an interview in Itanagar.

“We should always rely on our strength and take all steps to defend our borders without depending on anybody, no matter how good the relations in other fronts are,” he said in reply to a question.

“I can only say that another war between the two Asian giants will affect the economies of both. Instead, both should cooperate to sustain their fast growing economies,” he added.

Khandu was asked if he felt that India and China leading a joint block with Brazil and South Africa against the developed countries at the recent Copenhagen meet on climate change has brought both the two a step closer to an early solution to the border dispute, especially in Arunachal Pradesh.

China claims Arunachal as its territory which India has rejected. Khandu said land for eight Advanced Landing Grounds lying unused for long has been handed over to the Union defence ministry for free under a Memorandum of Understanding signed last year with the stipulation that they will be used both by military and civil aircraft.

The state government has also sent a proposal for construction of another ALG in the Buddhist town of Tawang, which attracts 9000 tourists every year, besides being an important border town from the strategic point of view.

The process for allotment of land for accommodation of the proposed deployment of two more divisions of army were also on.Khandu, who returned to power with two-thirds majority in the October assembly elections, said he intends to retire from politics after his present term expires.

He plans to complete some major projects that will help the backward state become prosperous by exploiting its huge natural resources.On the cards are the ambitious 1800 km Trans-Arunachal highway and other highways interlinking district headquarters and a four-lane link between the state capital with the rest of the country.

The famous hotel Dusit Thani Hua Hin overlooking the gulf of Thailand, where the leaders of India and China met, proudly proclaims, “We use gifts of the heavens to create heaven on earth.” It is one of Thailand’s most scintillating hubs, known for its calm and serene surroundings. I don’t know if the leaders noticed it, but they surely were there to create a better atmosphere between the two nuclear-powered nations which fought a bitter war forty-seven years ago and have been under the shadow of a cold war once again.

Manmohan Singh & Wen Jiabao

The meeting between Prime Ministers Manmohan Singh and Wen Jiabao must help calm the harshness in both the capitals. Prudence and pragmatism prevailed and the outcome was placidly correct. Just correct. Neither yielded the position he has stuck to and neither raised the decibel levels. You couldn’t have expected a tit-for-tat show there and while being conscious of the present situation, if both sides can reconcile themselves to building bridges while sorting out difference, neither loses.

Of late, the Chinese have been pricking Indian sensitivities at an extraordinarily fast pace. So much so that even the electioneering scenes in India were overpowered by the news regarding Chinese incursions, Indian rebuffs, major cover stories in media and the Arunachal CM meeting the Prime Minister.

Interestingly, in such a charged background our cool and gentle Manmohan Singh met Wen Jiabao and felt “excited” as the news reports say. I am sure this must be a reporter’s overenthusiasm, as he might have wanted to convey the thrill of the meeting. The reports said, “Manmohan Singh told Wen: ‘I am excited to see you.’ He said the Chinese people have had a number of achievements “and we share their sense of accomplishment”. He said this in the context of the 60th anniversary of the founding of modern China.”

The Chinese premier was more candid. He said, “We want to have a healthy and steady relationship with India. I hope we can use this opportunity to exchange our views on all related issues.”

As any student of Chinese affairs can tell, understanding diplomacy in Mandarin is a tricky job. Each word and the length of the sentence and similes used to convey the message have to be studied carefully. The official “leaks” do not tell us whether the Indian side conveyed any displeasure or annoyance to the Chinese premier on their cold-war like interventions and the Chinese side, it appears, was calmly “just diplomatically right”. It means they think what they have been doing so far is right and demands no explanation or relook.This must worry us.

The raking up of the border issue so forcefully, in spite of an agreement that the issue will be resolved amicably and through dialogue, has surprised many. While the pro-China lobby in Delhi blamed the American influence for creating an atmosphere that would make the Indian people ask for a reprisal, the factual position about Chinese arrogance spoke a different story. The situation on the Chinese side has to be understood before any final “assault”. The Chinese have grown rich, assertive and xenophobic in their global dreams. And this must make them more interventionist in near future.

It began with the Chinese incursions – observers say there had been more than 218 incursions by the Chinese security personnel since January this year. And the number of such incursions was higher in the Ladakh sector, where they have been successful to also make India dismantle a bridge on the Indus. The experts from Ladakh have been complaining that the Chinese have been intruding the Indian territory, they are not taking our land by inches but by yards. These experts also tells us the points and the nullahs where the Chinese came and then established their dominance. Yet nobody from the South Block took it seriously. Even the Army chief, Gen Deepak Kapoor, and our foreign minister, S M Krishna, gave contradictory statements about incursions. Still the Chinese belligerence didn’t stop. China objected to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s Arunachal visit, it began construction work in the Kashmir region which is under illegal occupation of Pakistan, in spite of having conceded by the Indian government that Tibet is a part of China (which the nationalist school of thought will never accept), China keeps showing Kashmir as an independent country and Sikkim has yet to be shown as an Indian state. It also began giving visas to Kashmiris separately and hasn’t quite understood about the terrorist problem India is facing though it would like us to understand its jihadi headache in Xinjiang.

China opposed India’s agreement with the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), it tried to block Asian Development Bank’s $60 million loan for a power generation project in Arunachal, and more recently it tried its hardest to coerce Southeast Asian nations against inviting India as a member of the East Asia summit. It has not only accepted a “gift” of land from Pakistan, which in fact is claimed by India, but has been strengthening Pakistan militarily by providing nuclear knowhow, among other things. On the maritime front, China is steadfastly modernizing its bases in the Indian Ocean with its port development projects going in full swing in Pakistan, Myanmar and Sri Lanka.

India expressed its concern over China’s new underground nuclear submarine base off the southern tropical island of Hainan. The then Naval chief, Sureesh Mehta, had publicly stated that the base poses a threat to Indian security. On the Arunachal border China has been shifting border pillars and making a dam on the Brahmaputra that would be a potential threat to the Indian people. On the Sikkim border a new highway and permanent army structures have come up. In times of any hostility, the Chinese would be able to cut the Siliguri corridor swiftly. On the other side, a joint command of Lanzhou Military Region opposite Ladakh, Himachal and Uttarakhand has come up. Tibet has become the most powerful Chinese base against India and reports say that China is in a position to send 20,000 troops anywhere on the Indian border from its Tibetan bases within two hours.

By contrast, Indian politicians have no idea what should be their Chinese policy and are busy in petty domestic rumblings or totally uninformed cacophonies. Once Arunachal used to have 12c functional air strips, now it has only two and more accurately just one, to cite an example of our preparedness. It’s only after the media taking up the Chinese threat that India responded by positioning its Sukhoi war planes replacing MIGs on the northeastern front and deciding to revive its four IAF bases on the Arunachal border (Vijaya Nagar, Mechuka, Tuting and Passighat), yet the confidence level hasn’t risen high on our side.

But it would be wrong to conclude that China would engage India in any military assault soon. It would also be imprudent and pathetically unintelligent to put China in the Pakistan category. It has to be a different story – we are not “1962” and China is not Maoist either. Keeping a watch on the factual positions, building our own defence and economy, we must continue to engae China in bilateral relations.

It was known in 2004 that A.Q.Khan, Pakistan’s nuclear scientist, who is wanted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Vienna, for interrogation in connection with his nuclear proliferation to North Korea, Iran and Libya, had left a letter with his wife Henny of Dutch origin and their daughter giving some details of his proliferation activities with the knowledge, if not prior approval, of the political and military leadership. The reported purpose of the letter was to tell his people that whatever he did, he did at the instance of the political and military leadership of the country and that he was not acting as a rogue proliferator as was sought to be made out by the leadership of the country.

2. He reportedly wanted his wife to release the letter to the public if any harm came to him. People close to him had also leaked to sections of the Pakistani media information about the letter written by him to his wife and daughter to be released if he was harmed. He feared that he might be prosecuted and jailed on the basis of confessions extracted under duress or handed over to the IAEA for interrogation and prosecution under US pressure.

3. Neither of these contingencies happened. The Pervez Musharraf Government pressured him to admit those proliferation activities, which had already come to the notice of the US and the IAEA and project them as carried out by him on his own independent initiative without the knowledge of the political and military leadership. In return, he was promised that he would be merely kept under house arrest to satisfy the US and not prosecuted or handed over to the IAEA for interrogation. He agreed to this deal.

4. After the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP)-led Government headed by Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani came to power in March last year, it removed some of the restrictions on his meeting others in his house. He took advantage of this to tell some Japanese correspondents that his contacts with North Korea were within the knowledge of Musharraf. The Government of Gilani denied his allegations and reimposed the restrictions on his interactions with journalists and other members of the public. On an appeal filed on his behalf, he was released from house arrest by a court, but was told by the court that he could not travel inside the country without the prior permission of the Government. The restrictions on his meeting journalists remained.

5. He again took up the matter before the Lahore High Court, which ordered the removal of all restrictions on his movements inside the country. These restrictions have been re-imposed by the Government by a fresh order.

6. Apparently angered by the continuing restrictions on him, his wife or daughter seems to have released the letter written by him to them in December, 2003, giving some details of his proliferation activities undertaken, according to him, at the instance of the Benazir Bhutto Government in the case of Iran and an unnamed Army General in the case of North Korea. It also gives details of the assistance received by Pakistan from China for the development of an atom bomb. The letter has reached the hands of a journalist by name Siman Henderson, who has published a story based on it in the “Sunday Times” of London of September 20, 2009. The journalist, in his story, has sought to give the impression that he had got hold of the letter independently through his contacts unconnected to the Khan family and that it has been in his possession since 2007, though he decided to make it public only now. It has to be noted that even now he has not published the entire letter which, according to him, ran to two pages. He has published only three or four paras. He has given some details of what the letter contained about China, North Korea and Iran. He says that the letter also refers to Libya, without specifying what. Is there an attempt by him to potect Libya? If so, why?

7. The “Times” article gives only details of his proliferation activities undertaken with the knowledge, if not at the instance, of the political and/or military leadership of Pakistan. It is silent on the proliferation activities undertaken by him at his own instance such as the supply of nuclear equipment to Libya and the setting up of facilities in Malaysia with the help of a Muslim of Indian/Sri Lankan origin for the manufacture of enrichment centrifuges for supply to Iran and Libya. It is also silent on his missile proliferation activities. The details given by Khan are meant to implicate his political and military leadership without enabling the IAEA and the US to have a full idea of the nuclear capabilities of Iran and North Korea. Khan has taken care to see that scanty details given by him could not be used by the US and the IAEA against Iran and North Korea.

8. Puzzlingfly, the maximum details given by him in his letter are regarding the assistance received by Pakistan from China for the development of a military nuclear capability. According to his letter, “we put up a centrifuge plant at Hanzhong (250km southwest of Xian). The Chinese gave us drawings of the nuclear weapon, gave us 50kg of enriched uranium, gave us 10 tons of UF6 (natural) and 5 tons of UF6 (3%).” The role of China in helping Pakistan develop a military nuclear capability, including the supply of the drawings of the first Chinese atomic bomb, were known earlier through human and technical intelligence reports, but this is the first time such authentic details have come from the scientist who developed Pakistan’s military nuclear programme. The details from the letter as revealed in the “Times” article do greater damage to China than to Iran and North Korea.

9. While there has been considerable international focus on Pakistan’s nuclear proliferation activities through AQ Khan, a similar focus on China’s role in nuclear proliferation has not been there so far. There have been many congressional enquiries in the US on China’s missile proliferation activities, but not on its nuclear proliferation activities. It is the copies of the A-bomb drawings passed on by China to Pakistan which were subsequently passed on by AQ Khan to Iran and Libya. India and Israel have been the worst sufferers of the Chinese nuclear proliferation in favour of Pakistan—-India directly and Israel indirectly.

10. Apart from reviving the demand for the interrogation of AQ Khan outside Pakistan by an independent IAEA team of experts, the IAEA should also ask for a full disclosure by China of its nuclear proliferation to Pakistan. An enquiry into this should also be taken up by the relevant US Congressional committees.

11. At a time when efforts are being made by the Government of India to discourage the anti-Chinese hysteria in our media over the reports of Chinese troop intrusions into Indian territory, the disclosures in AQ Khan’s letter of details of the Chinese assistance in developing an atomic bomb for possible use against India would add to the suspicions and fears in the Indian civil society over what they see as China’s malevolent attitude towards India. If China really values improved relations with India, it should volunteer a full disclosure of its nuclear supply relationship with Pakistan and give credible assurances to the Indian people that such instances will not recur in future. Unless and until this is done the trust deficit between the two countries will continue to remain wide.

December 17, 2009

Sources in the intelligence agency told this reporter that the Chinese interpreters in the Indian intelligence establishment have already got vital evidences that make it quite apparent that the Chinese have already prepared a blueprint for the operation in South India and would in the immediate future create several human interest think tanks in South India for garnering support from the intellectual community and to take the state’s intelligentsia as a major propaganda machinery for its sinister operations.

The Indian intelligence agencies are on the trail of a sinister plan of Chinese for integrating the operations of the Maoist groups with the banned Islamist organisation SIMI. A top official of the Intelligence Bureau while speaking to this reporter said that a meeting between some middle-level leaders of the two organisations was held in Bengaluru recently at the behest of a foreign intelligence agent and a Kerala-based former Naxalite leader is given the charge of the operation in South India.

The former SIMI chief Safdar Nagori during his interrogation has revealed to the Madhya Pradesh Police that his organisation has floated a 200-member suicide squad of which 40 are from Kerala.

The Chinese intelligence, it is learnt, is bent on creating an Islamist-Maoist nexus in South India, which, according to the experts, could prove to be a major force to destabilise the law and order situation in South India. The intelligence official also informed that the Chinese organisations have not yet come to the forefront but are pulling the strings using certain elements of the Pakistani intelligence as a camouflage. However sources in the agency told this reporter that the Chinese interpreters in the Indian intelligence establishment have already got vital evidences that make it quite apparent that the Chinese have already prepared a blueprint for the operation in South India and would in the immediate future create several human interest think tanks in South India for garnering support from the intellectual community and to take the state’s intelligentsia as a major propaganda machinery for its sinister operations.

It may be recalled that the CPI-M of Kerala, which has been the political party that attracted the left intellectuals, is now in the grip of a fierce factional war and several intellectuals have been shown the door by the official faction of the party because of their solidarity with the Chief Minister Achuthanandan, who is now functioning in the party without proper wings.

These elements, according to the experts in the intelligence agencies, have already been roped in by the Maoist and other dalit movements to set up their base among the intellectual community of the state.

Muslim Brotherhood by SIMI

The state police have already cracked the case relating to the brutal killing of a middle-aged person while he was on a morning walk and have found a dalit outfit-Dalit Human Rights Forum-behind the murder. After a close observation, it was established that the organisation formed less than two years ago in Aluva has gained momentum in several dalit hamlets in Kerala and that it is flush with funds. A top official of the Intelligence Bureau, who is in the state in connection with the probe on this organisation, told this reporter that they are ascertaining the role played by the external intelligence agencies in creating such an outfit.

The Intelligence Bureau, in its report presented before the Union Home Minister and the National Security Advisor a few weeks ago, has said that the situation in Kerala has gone out of control and that more and more youth are getting involved in terror operations with unabated support from certain mainstream political parties. The report also pointed out that there is a large presence of terror-trained youths in the coastal districts of Kerala and that the state police is not acting properly to the extent they should have acted. The Intelligence Bureau has made its probe deeper into Kerala following the death of four Islamic terrorists in Kashmir, who were all from Kerala.

October 30, 2009

The present congress government once again ignored and played down the serious threat that China poses to India.Manmohan Singh or anyone for that matter, cannot counter the Chinese directly unless we shed our complacency and red tapism atleast in security and defence related issues.

According to Arunachal Pradesh Chief Minister Dorjee Khandu, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has said that China has not constructed any dam on Brahmaputra river that would have been a matter of concern for India.

Manmohan Singh with Dorjee Khandu, the CM of Arunachal Pradesh

Khandu, who led a delegation of state leaders to Singh, said on Monday that the Prime Minister had also told them that India would tackle the boundary issue with China diplomatically. The delegation met Singh to seek a review of the defence strategy for the eastern sector in view of Chinese incursions and expressed serious concern over reports of a dam being constructed by China on Brahmaputra river.

“The Prime Minister said no dam is being constructed and only run-of-the-river construction has been made,” Khandu told reporters while citing a letter from the Chinese government. A media report last week had said that China was building a big dam on Brahmaputra river, prompting India to express concern over the development as it would change the course of the river and could result in submergence of low-lying areas downstream. India has no problem with run-off-the-river constructions but building of a dam as it involves storage of water.

When the delegation raised the issue of Chinese incursions into the state, the Prime Minister reportedly assured them that the Centre will “tackle” the boundary question with the neighbouring country bilaterally.

“The Prime Minister told us not to worry. He said the Centre will tackle with the situation bilaterally,” said Congress MP from Arunachal West Takam Sanjoy, who was part of the delegation. Sanjoy said the delegation requested the Prime Minister to give a big push to infrastructure development to ensure better surveillance over Chinese activities and urged him to create a para-military force exclusively comprising youths from the state.